Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
